On 2009-01-06, at 22:26, Michael Sutton wrote:
Issues concerning +1 delegation:
Previous emails suggested that the United States +1 delegation was lapsed as there was no demand - This is not the situation.
I certainly suggested no such thing, and I'm the last person you'll find calling +1 "United States". My point had nothing to do with the delegation or the demand for such; my point was that the testbed registry for 1.e164.arpa never attracted any data. I think you'll also find nobody in this thread advocating that 4.6.e164.arpa should not be delegated. What you might see is (to my eye) healthy scepticism about whether E.164 identifiers have any value in the coming century beyond a mechanism to gateway into a legacy communications network. Given that enthusiasm for ENUM seems largely confined to those who seek to make money from it or from those who chair working groups about it, it seems possible that this kind of scepticism is widespread. Joe